I skowed my composition teacher at uni a couple of tracks from Obscura. He actually really liked them and the next week had listened to the whole album. He picked up on alot of technical detail that I missed including complex rythmic patterns and the actual theoretical side of the harmony which is impossible for me to decipher without going over the sheet music. It didn't actually come as much of a surprise though because he listens to alot of 20th century classical music from serialism to Penderecki to minimalists, many of whom use similar rythmic, melodic and harmonic features to late era Gorguts. In fact I suspect that lot of late Gorguts is influenced by Luc Lemay's study of 20th century music.

I agree with Moses that the second Viennese school of classical enthusiasts would likely provide a much warmer reception. At best other classical enthusiasts might see metal as insipid art like that of the second Viennese school or at worst angry rock.

It needs to be remembered that classical music has always had divisions in it, from the Brahms against Wagner. To simple versus complex as the Baroque changed into the Classical period. From the Romantic versus the neo-Classical and the first Viennese school school against the second.

So it is often slavishly sentimental and, despite moments of brilliance, ultimately fails as far as reaching out beyond the human perspective goes? I'd rather think of metal as being capable of reaching a similar type of intellectuality as Bach, romanticism ultimately fails because it focuses far too much on aesthetic and not enough on composition. Brahms and later Beethoven are exceptions, the Wagnerian school could hardly be considered as such.

Ultimately 20th century classical music, the dissonant and the minimalist has far more in common with metal than older styles of classical much, not just aesthetically, but also because the art they produce exists in similar circumstances, meaning much of the intent is the same. It's even possible to trace the heritage,

Minimilism ------> Tangerine Dream + Punk = Burzum

I am studying composition at uni at the moment, and I can gurantee you there is a large focus on 20th century music, also it is foolish to assume that Gorguts could have created Obscura without a fairly wide knowledge of this type of music, the similarites are hardly possible to overlook.

Can we all agree that metal isn't as close to classical as it should be? Modern classical has all the formality and diligence that metal lacks - it knows how to say what it wants to say without appealing to the crowd. True, sometimes it lacks spirit, but the desperation of Gorecki's 3rd Symphony is conveyed far better than the desperation of Burzum. Metal has a strong spirit and a clear goal; now we only need superior ways to set it to music, so why not embrace the 20th century developments and learn from them?

Except that Gorecki's desperation is the fear of an impotent man in the face of modern failure, while Vikernes' is the desperation of a hero seeking to overcome that failure, and so, Burzum is rough-hewn genius and Gorecki's music is just an expertly crafted turd of passive aggression. Discipline cannot substitute for inspiration, nor a well-made surrender for art.

Except that Gorecki's desperation is the fear of an impotent man in the face of modern failure, while Vikernes' is the desperation of a hero seeking to overcome that failure, and so, Burzum is rough-hewn genius and Gorecki's music is just an expertly crafted turd of passive aggression. Discipline cannot substitute for inspiration, nor a well-made surrender for art.

We are in agreement here. What you call inspiration, I would call intellectual intuition, which is nothing other than a clear insight into the nature of reality as conveyed through a work of art. When these intuitions are pure they will manifest themselves in a suitable form, as with the works of Burzum. However the lack of intellectual rigour in metal composition allows for a complete degradation of the medium in a very short space of time. When the compositional method itself possesses something of an intuition then it is more resistant to inferior influences, and has greater possibility. If metal could capture the intellectual rigour of classical music it would have a much better chance of escaping its current crisis. It is not surprising that the only bands to have risen above the crowd since 96 are bands that place a strict emphasis on compositional rigour, Gorguts, Averse Sefira, Crimson Massacre, whereas the original greats of metal created much more spontaneous and as you say 'rough-hewn' works of art.

I will not comment on Gorecki as I have not heard him, except to say that many people here are too eager to equate 20th century art with fatalism. Sometimes the conveying of 'hopelessness' needs to be taken in its proper context, that of modern society. I also find it surprising that people here are fond of a band like Raison D'etre whilst critising classical composers who did similar things.

romanticism ultimately fails because it focuses far too much on aesthetic and not enough on composition.

I wholly disagree.

Pompous asses redefine "composition" to mean games with music theory, but to what end? The best Romantics were a balance of the two, because their goal was not either aesthetic OR composition, but an abstraction: an expression of life leading to the transcendent.

When you think about it, most of the theoretical music is a realm for trivial minds: they have memorized rules, and they have learned to layer variations, and then -- what greatness does their music speak?

Is art an object in itself, or like architecture, a communication of a mode of living?